If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

If you're aren't dual booting, and you want the most security, then NTFS is the onlly way to go. Period. NTFS gives you the ability to lock down individual files (to a point, it is only Microsoft), where FAT32 does not. The only reason to go FAT32 in this case would be if you were dual booting, which you've stated you are not.

Just remember: Abraham Lincoln didn\'t die in vain. He died in Washington D.C.

Originally posted here by DarkGuardian If you're aren't dual booting, and you want the most security, then NTFS is the onlly way to go. Period. NTFS gives you the ability to lock down individual files (to a point, it is only Microsoft), where FAT32 does not. The only reason to go FAT32 in this case would be if you were dual booting, which you've stated you are not.

What does dual booting have to do with your choice of filesystems? You can, in fact, dual boot NTFS. Right now I'm dual booting Gentoo Linux (EXT3) and Windows XP Pro (NTFS.)

What does dual booting have to do with your choice of filesystems? You can, in fact, dual boot NTFS. Right now I'm dual booting Gentoo Linux (EXT3) and Windows XP Pro (NTFS.)

Yes, but depending on what he would dual boot into, it might make a difference. I've had problems with dual boot 98/NT or 98/2000 it if wasn't FAT32. Yes, you can dual boot with NTFS, but depending on the OS involved, might not be the best choice.

Since he's not dual booting, though, the point is moot. Always use NTFS if at all possible in a Windows environment.

Just remember: Abraham Lincoln didn\'t die in vain. He died in Washington D.C.